Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1887-09-01
LOCALITY LOCALIZED
The Weekly Round Up OF the
Events of Interest and I'M
portance in the City
.. .... and County.
AS Gathered and Prepared for the
Edification and Information
OF The Alert's Numer-
Gus Readers.
CITY COUNCIL.
The Electric Light Matter Thor
ouehly Discussed.


The Electric Light Matter Thor
oughly Discussed.
Adjourned meeting of the city council
yesterday afternoon, Mayor Graham IN
the chair. Present-Aldermen Clark,
Dole, Driscoll, Hughes, Ingraham, Muel-
ler, Selvidge and Watson.
The minutes of the special meeting
held August 23d were read and approved
s.. Alderman Watson offered an amend
ment to the electric light ordinance stril1-
ing out the words "sole and exclusive' in
lines 4S and 49 of the second section.
Upon request OF Alderman Driscoll,
the proposed electric light ordinance was
again read and the citizens present were
asked to express their opinion OF the
same.
Roderick Rose being called upon stated
that with the amendment proposed, the
ordinance suited him; that it had been
carefully drawn and that the rights OF
the city and citizens had been we'll guard
ed.
Anton Klaus, ST., introduced to the
council his partner in the bid OF Klaus u
Co., Mr.. Barker. of the firm of Kruse 4
Barker, Milwaukee, and asked that he be
allowed to say few words in reference
to the matter under discussion.
Mr.. Barker reviewed the matter at
length, taking up and discussing the va
rious resolutions circulars, ETC., in con-
nection with the electric light which had
passed the council, and contended that
his firm had not been given fair chance;
that the resolution to throw out all bids
not based upon the Brush, Edison,
Thompson-H -Hueston and United States
systems, had not been brought to
their notice; that such determination was
not stated in the notice to bidders; that
their bid would have been different
had they known such determination, and
that it was not fair that they should be
compelled to put in a bid in such blind
manner. He also contended that it one
bidder should be allowed to amend or
supplement his bid the same privilege
should be granted to all bidders, or that
all should be rejected and new ones re-
ceived.. In reference to the manner IN
which the bids had been figured for pub
lication, Mr.. Barker stated that an erro-
neo,1s and unfair basis had been adopted; !;
that 400 incandescent lights would not
be in operation here for several years,and
that if the unjust basis of eight arc lights
for the city, fifteen arc and one hundred
and fifty incandescents ~for private con-
sumers had been taken, the difference IN
the bids of Klaus & Co. and Mr.. Durs-
tine would have been only a few hund-
red dollars. In regard to rates for pr1-
vate consumers, Mr.. Barker stated that
only the maximum price had been given
"a price beyond which they agreed not to
go-and that such rates must and are al
ways regulated by circumstances; that
the questions of location and number of
lights taken would determine how much
cheaper they should go. He also stated
that it was his understanding that a
maximum and not minimum price for
private consumers was what was asked
for by the council; also that the. Brush
was much cheaper light than the
Thompson-Hueston.
Alderman Watson called the attention
of all to the fact that the council had
originally designed to protect private
consumers as we'll as the city itself, and
read a section from the circular to bid
ders to that effect.
Alderman Dole called for the reading
of Alderman Watson's resolution OF July
9th.
A, Klaus, ST., stated that the resolu-
tion referred to, which passed by the
unanimous vote of the council, declared
that only $500 per year would be expend
ed for city lamps, and inquired why the
aldermen proposed to accept the bid of
Mr.. Durstine, when it was 1896 per ye ar.
or 1896 more than they had declared they
would expend.
In reply to the gentlemen who had pre-
ceded him, Alderman Watson stated that
the bid Of Il. B. Durstine had been ac-
cepted by resolution Of the council; that
the bid of Klaus & Co., was out of the
field, and that any time which was given
to the advocates of that bid was only ac-
corded through courtesy. In regard to
the $500 limitation Mr.. Watson said that
was for arc lights; that at that time an
incandescent system Of street lighting
was proposed but that afterward the
council declared in favor of eight arc
lights in a resolution passed August ~,
which supercedes the one limiting the
expenditure to $780, In regard to esti-
mating the comparative standing of the
bids-that was done by resolution
which received the unanimous vote OF
the council; that by the method SO adop--
ted the bid of L. 3. Durstine was found